Quick Actions

  • Invite people who work on similar topics, including other technical committees.
  • Make it clear how people can take part at each step.
  • Offer simple, task-based ways to help for example reviewing a draft, or giving feedback.
  • Make sure people with lived experience of disability are included and supported whilst they attend these meetings.

Long-term Actions

  • Have meetings that are open to everyone. This can help users of the standard, advocates, and technical experts meet and talk together in the same room. Not every meeting needs to be open but it’s helpful to have planned times when anyone can join, listen, share ideas and offer input.
  • Give committees the support and tools they need to include external contributors.

Examples

  • USA  – American National Standards Institute (ANSI) ANSI uses open comment periods and webinars to allow public feedback on standards, particularly from disability organizations, with accessible formats for all.
  • India – Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) BIS has an online consultation platform where anyone, including disabled individuals, can review drafts, with plain language summaries and accessible design to enhance participation.
  • Australia – Standards Australia Standards Australia releases draft standards publicly and provides easy online feedback channels, along with alternative formats and online workshops for inclusive participation.
  • Canada – Digital Governance Standards Institute (DGSI) DGSI has adopted an open technical committee model that welcomes wide participation and encourages diversity. Their standards development process is made publicly available from the outset, and individuals can join at different stages based on their availability and interest. There are no limits on the number of participants per committee, nor are there set time commitments that allow people to contribute flexibly, based on their capacity.

Barriers these actions address

Closed-door technical committees

Why is this a problem?

Standards are often developed by technical committee members, behind closed doors. Public consultation may happen later, but opportunities to give feedback are limited and may not be meaningful. Many D/deaf and D/disabled people have valuable experience that could improve the standard, but there is usually no way for outsiders to join or contribute, even temporarily. This limits diverse input and can reduce the quality and accessibility of the standard.

Ways to address the barrier

  • Open up committee meetings and allow outside participation